Transcription

1 Who s Doing the Protecting in Protected Areas? A Global Perspective on Protected Area Governance Brent A. Mitchell AROUND THE WORLD, NATIONAL PARKS AND OTHER PROTECTED AREAS go by a lot of different names, including park, reserve, seashore, site, landmark, nature park, sanctuary, to give just a few examples in English. Or, even more to the point, many protected areas are different but go by the same name. (In the most common example, national parks in the U.K. are not publicly owned lands.) To quote the George Wright Society website, Unless we can communicate with each other and with the rest of the world, protected areas will not be successful. To illustrate how difficult that communication can be internationally, here is an example from outside of conservation. If you walk into any Starbucks in America and ask for a café grande, they will give you their medium-sized cup of coffee. If you ask for a café grande in Mexico, they may give you a bowl of coffee and a quizzical look. Ask for caffé grande in Venice, and they will direct you to a shop on the Piazza Indipendenza. To understand parks and protected areas globally, we have to have a common language. A loon to us is a diver to others, but is internationally understood as Gavia spp., at least to those who have studied the classification system. To address this problem, IUCN The World Conservation Union (IUCN) created a classification system for protected areas in 1994 (Table 1). Without changing national or local names, the IUCN categories attempt to address the labels issue by identifying protected areas by their primary management objectives. Of course, every park is unique, but many share similar management objectives, while others have different objectives. The categories are currently under review, following an important meeting held in Spain in May While reviewing management categories, the same global organization, IUCN, is also looking at governance of protected areas. Generally speaking, here in North America and elsewhere, governments have been viewed as the primary and dominant managers of parks and protected areas for about a century. The last World Parks Congress (2003 in South Africa) recognized that four general governance types exist today: government, co-managed, private, and community-conserved areas (Figure 1). This article focuses on private protected areas, as an example of how protected area management paradigms are expanding. When is a protected area officially a protected area? The foundation of the categories system is the 1994 IUCN definition of a protected area : An area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of Volume 24 Number 3 (2007) 81

2 Table 1. The IUCN protected area management categories. Adapted (in order of listing only) from IUCN (The category system is currently under review.) natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means. The categories system of IUCN (Table 1) has had some success in standardizing understanding of protected areas management, especially among more established park systems. However, there are a great many areas that are protected de facto or de jure (and often both) that meet the IUCN definition but have not been specifically recognized as protected areas and not listed in the World Database on Protected Areas. In the United States alone, there are thousands of private protected areas that satisfy the definition, yet only 23 are currently listed as private reserves in the database. One of the purposes of the 1994 category guidelines was to alert governments to the importance of protected areas and encourage development of systems of protected areas, and in that they have had demonstrable impact since that time. Though extra-governmental protected areas were never specifically excluded from consideration, in practice most governments focused on those areas over which they exercised direct management authority, through public ownership or other means. Protected areas are also owned and managed through private mechanisms in most of the world, and their number and extent are growing fast. Often the result of local initiative and conducted without the direct intervention of government, they are not yet fully integrated in national conservation planning or reporting in many countries. As we have seen, the international system of protected area management categories historically emphasized the role of 82 The George Wright Forum

3 Figure 1. Protected area governance types. governments. Reflecting this, private protected areas are not as well understood globally as their contributions warrant. The current review of the categories represents an opportunity to recognize the full spectrum of protected area governance (Mitchell 2007). The history of protected areas in the U.S. is a good example. The U.S. system of national parks is well recognized around the world. But few people know that private protected areas have been established for nearly as long. Yellowstone National Park, often cited as the world s first national park, was created in 1872, but the second was not designated until The Trustees of Reservations in Massachusetts, the first land trust, dates to Both the public and private protected area initiatives began as efforts to preserve special areas for the benefit of the public, and their purpose in land protection was likened to those museums and libraries: safeguarding great works of art and literature for the public to enjoy. Indeed, the original name of the first land trust was The Trustees of Public Reservations, though the legislative act creating it clearly indicates a private corporation: All personal property held by said corporation, and all lands which it may cause to be opened and kept open to the public, and all lands which it may acquire and hold with this object in view, shall be exempt from taxation, in the same manner and to the same extent as the property of literary, benevolent, charitable, educational, and scientific institutions incorporated within this Commonwealth is now exempt by law; but no lands so acquired and held and not open to the public shall be so exempt from taxation for a longer period than two years. Said corporation shall never make any division or dividend of or from its property or income among its members. (Technically, of course, government does not own land, but holds it in the public trust. The word public was removed from Volume 24 Number 3 (2007) 83

4 the name of The Trustees of Reservations in 1954 to avoid confusion.) Land trusts and related private conservation initiatives developed in parallel with public efforts, starting in the East, where most land was privately owned, while national parks and reserves were first formed primarily in the West, where a majority of land was held by government. However, the rate of development of private reserves was much slower than public counterparts for the first 50 to 75 years (Brewer 2003), which partly explains why they are less well recognized. Today there are over 1,500 land trusts in the United States (Aldrich 2003). They operate in all 50 states, with distribution quickly equalizing across the country (Figure 2). Similarly, the land trust movement has been growing in Canada, with a new national network established, and the first national conference convened this year. Privately run protected areas have been growing in extent and number in many parts of the world, particularly Latin America and the Caribbean, east and southern Africa, Australia, and Europe. An assumption underlying the recent growth in private protected areas is that management may be most effective when the managers have an interest in the land: a legal interest, an economic interest; interest as an individual, a group, or a corporation. But we must not be naïve. Though non-confrontational and (in most cases) apolitical, working willingly on a voluntary basis, not all landowners are motivated by altruistic intentions. As has been the experience with other conservation frameworks of great promise, realities have not always met expectations. Along Figure 2. Land trust properties are perhaps the best-known examples of private protected areas in the United States. Wilson Salt Marsh, Essex County Community Greenbelt, Massachusetts. Photo by the author. 84 The George Wright Forum

5 with great success there have been some disappointing outcomes and some abuses, and the international protected areas community should be prepared to respond appropriately. A unique governance type The 2003 World Parks Congress identified four main protected area governance types: (A) government-managed protected areas; (B) co-managed protected areas; (C) private protected areas; and (D) community-conserved areas. Embedded in the private protected area type description ( C in the typology above) are four ownership models: Individual, areas in which ownership is held by a single person or family; Cooperative, perhaps the rarest form; examples include the Ahuenco Conservation Community in Chile; Non-governmental organization (NGO), private not-for-profit organizations operating to advance a specific mission and usually controlled by a board and specific regulations; and Corporate, a for-profit company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity, usually controlled by an executive, an oversight board, and, ultimately, individual shareholders. Each of these general ownership models (and myriad variations on them) has particular implications for management. (For more on community-conserved areas, see Borrini-Feyerbend et al. 2004) It is vitally important to avoid simplistic value judgments about which kinds of protected areas are more important, or what kind of governance model is better than another. We live in a complex world, and the fact that we have many different flavors of protected areas reflects that. Some management categories are more suited to some locations than others, and some governance models are more suitable or attainable in some places than others. Furthermore, sometimes it may be beneficial to have the flexibility to change management or governance over time; in other circumstances it is better to lock in strong protection in perpetuity. Governance is a cross-cutting descriptor of protected areas; that is, although historically developed with government primarily in mind, the categories can be applied irrespective of ownership. Private protected areas can and do fall into all of the 1994 IUCN categories, and presumably will apply in any future amendments. It would be incorrect to assume that private protected areas are better represented under categories IV VI; many fit the management objectives of I III, perhaps especially those owned or managed by NGOs. Special reference to geographic scale may be necessary when considering governance, though it is equally important to consider in management categories. The geographic definition used to describe a protected area may affect the governance type that best describes it. While certainly there are large areas under single ownership/management authority, simply put the larger the geographic area the more likely it is to contain multiple owners/managers and, depending on the country, the more likely to include different governance types. This could lead to a large proportion of protected areas being assigned as co-management protected areas ( B ), even though this may not best represent the dominant power relationship affecting management objectives. On the other hand, a picture of Volume 24 Number 3 (2007) 85

6 otherwise coherent landscapes, where a matrix of ownership patterns has evolved over time, may be obscured by piecemeal application of the categories by government type. Should IUCN pursue options for integrating government types with management objectives, considerable planning and testing would be required to find and establish protocols for application to complex protected areas. The problem is similar to that of applying management categories to protected areas with multiple management zones, but adds a dimension. Though challenging, the higher the resolution in applying the categories the sharper a picture of the state of protected areas will appear (Mitchell 2007). Use and misuse of protected area statistics A full counting of the extent of private lands, 2 as well as community-conserved areas and co-managed protected areas, that satisfy the IUCN definition of a protected area would significantly expand the aggregate statistics for the area protected around the world. Broad statistics can be used inappropriately and, stripped of detail on the objectives and effectiveness of management designations, can give the impression that a very great deal of land and sea are already adequately conserved. Summary protected area totals can and have been used to argue against the designation of additional protected areas or commitment of resources for conservation work within them. To quote Andrew Land, there are those who would use statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts for support rather than for illumination. As IUCN reviews definitions of and guidelines for protected area management categories, it may also need to establish or review internal policies 86 for the use of global protected area statistics. But potential misuse of aggregate statistics should not restrict efforts to describe conservation work that is and has been done at local and national levels. The international system of protected area management categories was intended to provide a shared understanding of local and national protected areas at a global level, to reflect rather than direct national and local policies. A key point of contention about the categories system stems from a concern that recognizing the spectrum of management objectives and governance types that exist today might dilute the definition of a protected area and possibly divert attention from biodiversity conservation. Part of the issue derives from basic interpretations of what the protected in protected area means. In all three core languages of IUCN, the name implies a level of completeness and a past tense that belies the constant management and vigilance that true protection requires. Meeting the definition is not an endpoint, but only the beginning of management to achieve specific conservation objectives. (From the Convention on Biodiversity definition of a protected area as a geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives.) Effective means The important point, of course, is not how many protected areas there are, what category they are described under, nor even who owns them, but how well they are managed for ecological and other public benefits. Private protected areas are as susceptible as government areas to being paper parks, designated or otherwise recognized as a protected area without having any sig- The George Wright Forum

7 nificant positive conservation impact. Or worse, having a negative impact. All protected areas should be managed and understood according to their relationship to the IUCN protected area management categories. These universal guidelines apply without prejudice to size, geography, or ownership/governance status. Using universal categories is a first step to evaluating the effectiveness of park management across borders. In the majority of cases, the creation of a private protected area and management of the same for conservation objectives is a voluntary act on the part of the landowners. A growing recognition of the opportunities for achieving conservation objectives on private land and especially the proliferation of mechanisms and incentives for doing so has resulted in a dramatic increase in the number and extent of private protected areas in the last century, and in some countries these increases have been logarithmic in scale in the past few decades. Motivations and incentives If creating private protected areas is a voluntary act, what factors motivate landowners? These are generally more complex than they might appear, and probably few private reserves owe their origin to a single motive. Profit especially tourism is often cited, but may be the primary motivation in fewer cases than might be imagined. (Unfortunately, there is not enough reliable quantitative data on private protected areas to venture even an informed opinion on this point.) Voluntary acts to create private reserves can be divided into intrinsic motivations (impelled by the essential nature of the actor; in this case, the landowner) and extrinsic incentives (incited by something outside of the actor; Table 2). Of the four groups identified in the private protected area definition, NGOs are assumed to be motivated by their mission to preserve biodiversity, nature, or heritage, as the case may be intrinsic by definition. But some Table 2. Examples of mechanisms and incentives for private land protection. Volume 24 Number 3 (2007) 87

8 NGOs derive profit from compatible activities in some reserves and apply the funds to conservation in less-visited reserves. Company protected areas are the least-well studied. According to Stolton and Dudley 2007, It is clear that there is a wide range of quality in terms of company involvement in protected areas some excellent examples exist but there are also cases where setting aside a reserve is little more than a publicity exercise. Corporations are assumed to be profit-motivated of course, but this incentive may not always be the most immediate. For example, the public relations value of acting as a good corporate citizen may be motivation enough in the case of multinationals, or local corporations for whom product image is important. It is of course valuable for communities to protect their immediate surroundings, but they also may respond to government subsidies or preferential revenue sharing (see Rambaldi et al. 2005). The motivations of individual landowners may be the most complex of all. Certainly many are personally concerned about nature (intrinsic motivation) but may need help (extrinsic incentive) to act on that concern. Incentives take many forms, from tax relief, compensation, and payment for ecological services (see Chacon 2005). But incentives need not be financial. Creating a private protected area may entitle the landowner to preferential technical or other assistance. Again, Rambaldi et al. (2005) cite reserve creation to enable landowners to prohibit hunting on their property. In areas of high development pressure, landowners often face negative incentives for conservation. Creating a private reserve, or granting an easement, gives a landowner an option out of perverse economic or regulatory conditions that might compel him or her to act in ways contrary to personal convictions. This is clear in the United States, where high property taxes have forced landowners to develop land against their preference, just to meet their tax obligations. Private reserves take many forms, and they reflect the social and economic conditions in which they are found. Generally they are most developed in countries with secure land tenure systems that allow private ownership. Though historical precedents are ancient, especially among the wealthy and powerful, systems of private protected areas are a relatively recent phenomenon, and it is logical to assume that private reserves will increase in number and geographic reach if land tenure systems continue to formalize and liberalize around the world. As Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto writes, Contrary to popular belief, property systems open to all citizens are a relatively recent phenomenon no more than two hundred years old and the full implications of the transition have yet to emerge. A global trend Private protected areas are many, diverse, and proliferating around the world. Land trusts in the U.S. will be familiar to GWS members and readers, but almost all countries in the western hemisphere now have some form of private reserve system, many of them originating in the last decade. Safari tourism, among other factors, has contributed to the rise of private game reserves in eastern and southern Africa. A century after the creation of the National Trust in England, private land protection is growing across Europe. And it can be effec- 88 The George Wright Forum

9 tive. The Foundation for Territory and Landscape has become the largest private landowner in Catalonia, Spain, in its first eight years of existence (Rafa 2005). Private reserves in the Atlantic Coastal Forest of Brazil have along with an intensive captive breeding program increased populations of the golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia), the only primate species ever to be shifted into a lower threat category on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Rambaldi et al. 2005). From a governmental perspective, private protected areas (as well as community conserved areas and co-managed areas) can represent an effective means to achieving conservation objectives. (At the most recent George Wright conference, I heard a park superintendent say that the National Park Service is stretched thin. Stretched thin? The United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, with a premier protected area system, we think. If we are feeling stretched, where does that leave other countries?) Private and community groups can sometimes be more efficient than government counterparts, and their contributions reduce the management burden on government authorities. Significantly, as protected area strategies grow in geographic scale, other governance types become necessary, as large landscape conservation projects overlay extensive areas of private lands or locally managed resources. The category system holds the potential to assist governments in monitoring private conservation activities, evaluating both the management objectives of private protected areas and their effectiveness. There are, of course, local and national safeguards in place in some countries intended to ensure that private protected areas are managed according to designation, regulation, or proclamation. The practical significance and implementation of these safeguards varies widely among countries. (There are also examples of self-regulation of private protected areas, such as the developing land trust accreditation program in the United States.) A standardized and verifiable management category system operating at an international level could provide governments with a comparative basis for monitoring private protected areas within their national conservation strategies. Conclusion An understanding of the status of protected areas worldwide requires standards for describing their management objectives. The protected area management categories of IUCN provide a standard, but are currently under review. The category system describes existing national and subnational management objectives but is not intended to dictate them. Private protected areas are a large and growing subset of the world s protected areas, but are under-represented in the body of areas recognized by IUCN and reported in the World Database of Protected Areas. Integrating governance types with management categories in the future will enhance an understanding of the state of protected areas worldwide, and a binomial system is suggested. IUCN s World Commission on Protected Areas could foster a science to measure effectiveness of protected areas globally, but only if criteria and guidelines are specific enough to allow objective application of the management categories. Volume 24 Number 3 (2007) 89

10 Endnotes 1. Sequoia was created in September 1890, followed closely by General Grant (later incorporated into Kings Canyon) and Yosemite. Technically, the second U.S. national park was Mackinac Island in Michigan. In 1875, most of the island, including Fort Mackinac, was designated as Mackinac Island National Park by Congress. When the fort was decommissioned in 1895, all the federal land on the island was transferred to the state of Michigan and is today a state park. 2. Private ownership rarely applies to the marine environment, though obviously protection of the terrestrial side of the land/sea interface is often a high conservation priority. References Aldrich, Rob Land Trust Census Washington, D.C.: The Land Trust Alliance. Bernstein, John, and Brent A. Mitchell Land trusts, private reserves and conservation easements in the United States. Parks 15:2, Bishop, Kevin, Nigel Dudley, Adrian Phillips, and Sue Stolton Speaking a Common Language: The Uses and Performance of the IUCN System of Management Categories for Protected Areas. Cardiff, Wales, U.K.: Cardiff University, IUCN, and United Nations Environmental Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Borrini-Feyerabend, Grazia, Ashish Kothari, and Gonzalo Oviedo Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas: Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation. Best Practice Series no. 11. Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, U.K.: IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas. Brewer, Richard Conservancy: The Land Trust Movement in America. Lebanon, N.H.: Dartmouth College (University Press of New England). Chacon, Carlos Fostering conservation of key priority sites and rural development in Central America: The role of private protected areas. Parks 15:2, IUCN Guidelines for Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, U.K.: IUCN and World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Mitchell, Brent A Private protected areas. Unpublished paper prepared for the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas Categories Task Force., ed Private protected areas. Special issue of Parks (15:2). Mitchell, Brent, and Jessica Brown Stewardship and protected areas in a global context: Coping with change and fostering civil society. In Reconstructing Conservation: Finding Common Ground. Ben Minteer and Robert Manning, eds. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Phillips, Adrian A short history of the international system of protected areas management categories. Unpublished discussion paper prepared for IUCN. Rafa, Miquel Protecting nature and landscapes in southern Europe: A social approach. Parks 15:2, Rambaldi, Denise, Rosan Valter Fernandez, and Mauricio Augusto Reolon Schmidt Private protected areas and their key role in the conservation of the Atlantic Forest biodiversity hotspot. Parks 15:2, The George Wright Forum

QUÉBEC DECLARATION ON ECOTOURISM In the framework of the UN International Year of Ecotourism, 2002, under the aegis of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Tourism Organization

Appendix A. The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) is added to Division 3 of the Fish and

ECHOES FROM BARILOCHE: Conclusions, Recommendations and Action Guidelines The Second Latin American Congress on National Parks and other Protected Areas aimed to asses, value and project the contribution

Protected Area Categories and Management Objectives A protected area is defined as: An area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural

2015 Public Policy Agenda Indiana s philanthropic sector plays an important role in promoting and supporting the quality of life in this state. The almost 1200 family, independent, community, and corporate

Policy statement Prepared by the ICC Commission on Taxation Limitations of deductions of interest payments Highlights ICC notes that differences in the tax treatment of equity and debt financing have a

Accountability: Data Governance for the Evolving Digital Marketplace 1 1 For the past three years, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton & Williams LLP has served as secretariat for the

THE SEVILLE STRATEGY FOR BIOSPHERE RESERVES BIOSPHERE RESERVES: THE FIRST TWENTY YEARS Biosphere reserves are designed to deal with one of the most important questions the World faces today: How can we

Recent developments regarding Mexico s tax treaty network and relevant court precedents Mexico has a relatively short background on the negotiation and application of treaties for the avoidance of double

ECOLOGICAL A MEANS OF CONSERVING BIODIVERSITY AND SUSTAINING LIVELIHOODS RESTORATION The Society for Ecological Restoration International (SER) is a non-profit organization infused with the energy of involved

A Functional Classification System for Marine Protected Areas in the United States The U.S. Classification System: An Objective Approach for Understanding the Purpose and Effects of MPAs as an Ecosystem

National BiodiversityStrategyandActionPlan (NBSAP),St. Lucia page 8 Resource tenure and access Most agricultural lands, and a majority of forest lands, are privately owned. Two significant trends can be

PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES A Position Paper Prepared by the NSFRE Government Relations Committee January 1997 SUMMARY The National Society of Fund Raising Executives (NSFRE) is opposed to proposals by state

Role of Civil Society Organisations in REDD Projects A joint study by the Conservation Finance Alliance and PricewaterhouseCoopers Sergio Salas pwc Agenda/Contents Our work in ecosystems and biodiversity

1. INTRODUCTION CORPORATE MEMBERS OF LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS 1.1 This note, prepared on behalf of the Company Law Committee of the City of London Law Society ( CLLS ), relates to BIS request for

Parks, people, planet: inspiring solutions The world s premier gathering on protected areas The IUCN World Parks Congress 2014 (WPC 2014) is a landmark global forum on protected areas held once every ten

Grade 4 Expectations in History and Social Science 19 Grade 4 North American Geography with Optional Standards for One Early Civilization In grade 4 students study the geography and people of the United

The Marine Protected Area Inventory New pictures Jordan Gass, Hugo Selbie and Charlie Wahle ESRI Ocean Forum November 6, 2013 Outline What is the MPA Inventory? Purpose Data How it s used Future directions

Brussels, 31 May 2011 Joint position on the Consultation Paper on the Green Paper on the future of the VAT Towards a simpler, more robust and efficient VAT system COM(2010) 695 final Introduction Conscious

ETNO Reflection Document in reply to the EC consultation on Future networks and the Internet early challenges regarding the Internet of things November 2008 Executive Summary The Internet of the future

Biological Diversity and Tourism: Development of Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism in Vulnerable Ecosystems Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity Foreword The rapid and often uncontrolled

First Annual Centennial Strategy for Yucca House National Monument August 2007 Year: 2007 Vision Statement Yucca House National Monument was set aside in 1919 to preserve an unexcavated Ancestral Puebloan

Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights Adopted by the UNESCO General Conference, 19 October 2005 The General Conference, Conscious of the unique capacity of human beings to reflect upon their

THE INTER-UNIVERSITY COUNCIL FOR EAST AFRICA THE NEED TO ESTABLISH A REGIONAL SYSTEM OF ACCREDITATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS AND PROGRAMMES IN EAST AFRICA 1.0 Introduction According to the World

Norwegian Forests Policy and Resources 21 Forestry in Norway Norway has long traditions in forestry and forest management, and for using wood in construction and as a source of energy. Sawn wood and round

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 2: 211 216, 2002. 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. ILA New Delhi Declaration of Principles of International

Australian Government Response to the Senate Committee on Finance and Public Administration Australian Government Response to the Senate Committee on Finance and Public Administration Native Vegetation

Easements: Protection without Ownership Using Easements to protect properties that are not for sale A preservation organization doesn t have to acquire real estate to gain control over its future. Preservation

Please note: This text is from the fourth edition of Federal Historic Preservation Laws, published in 2006 by the National Center for Cultural Resources, National Park Service, Department of the Interior.

Submission Guide: Native Plants and Animals A guide for making submissions on the NSW biodiversity reforms This document provides the detailed information stakeholders will need to know about the new approach

COMMENTARY ON THE RESTRICTIONS ON PROPRIETARY TRADING BY INSURED DEPOSITARY INSTITUTIONS By Paul A. Volcker Full discussion by the public, and particularly by directly affected institutions, on the proposed

Tri-National Initiative On Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture and Water Quality Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture Water Policy: The North American Experience Richard Swenson United States Department

Version: 3.7.2007 South Australia Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction Act 2007 An Act to provide for measures to address climate change with a view to assisting to achieve a sustainable future

Strengthening Leadership Capacity for Effective Management of China s Protected Areas Executive Summary The (CPALAP) is a multi-year initiative launched in 2008 under a partnership between the China State

Invest in Nature THE CONSERVATION NOTE Bring nature into your investment portfolio YOUR INVESTMENTS Your investments have the power to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends. You can help

RETHINKING THE CONCEPT OF INFORMATION PRIVACY: A JAPANESE PERSPECTIVE Yohko Orito and Kiyoshi Murata Abstract On 1 April 2005, the Japanese government enforced Act on the Protection of Personal Information

Romanian Economic and Business Review Vol. 2, No. 4 ELIMINATING ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS: FROM DISCRETIONARY POLICY TO MARKET SOLUTIONS Bogdan Glăvan Abstract Environmental problems have become in the last

THE CULTURE OF INNOVATION AND THE BUILDING OF KNOWLEDGE SOCIETIES - Issue Paper - UNESCO, Bureau of Strategic Planning September 2003 1 I. The past and present scope of innovation During the last two decades,

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME Environment for Development UNEP is the voice for the environment within the United Nations system UNEP s mission is to provide leadership and encourage partnership

1 Principles for Non-Governmental Organizations Introduction Persuaded by experience that a person s moral sense contributes to success in business endeavors, in 1994 the Caux Round Table published its

The Future of Small Town Computing: A Cloud or a Digital Divide? David Davies, DLS Director of Information Technology Municipal computing in New England is different than in most of the country. Elsewhere,

Part I Professional (Self) Regulation of Academic Quality David D. Dill and Maarja Beerkens Historically self-regulation has been the dominant mode for assuring academic quality in the US and the UK higher

A protected area is defined by the IUCN as a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature

5 JUNE 2015 MINISTERIAL MEETING OF THE BLUE WEEK 2015 We, Ministers responsible for Ocean/ Fisheries/ Maritime Affairs, having met in Lisbon on June the 5 th, 2015, at the invitation of the Minister of

Fourth European Conference of Ministers responsible for the Cultural Heritage (Helsinki, 30-31 May 1996) Final Declaration and resolutions Meeting in Helsinki on 30-31 May 1996 for their 4th European conference,

Wages in and Hospitals and Universities by Karen P. Shahpoori and James Smith Bureau of Labor Statistics Originally Posted: June 29, 2005 Do for-profit establishments pay higher wages than nonprofit establishments?

Fisheries and Oceans Canada Species at Risk Act Listing Policy and Directive for Do Not List Advice DFO SARA Listing Policy Preamble The Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Species at Risk Act (SARA) Listing

Charter The first International Conference on Health Promotion, meeting in Ottawa this 21 st day of November 1986, hereby presents this CHARTER for action to achieve Health for All by the year 2000 and

MUSEUM ASSOCIATES AND THE DEPARTMENT OF MUSEUM OF ART, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COMBINING FINANCIAL STATEMENT YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2014 COMBINING FINANCIAL STATEMENT YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2014 CONTENTS Independent

DRAFT CANCUN DECLARATION ON MAINSTREAMING THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIODIVERSITY FOR WELL-BEING We, the Ministers of environment, agriculture, fisheries, forestry and tourism from countries

Statement for the Record On Behalf of the AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION Before the Antitrust Tax Force Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives May 15, 2008 Statement for the Record

SECOND ANNUAL MEETING of the LATIN AMERICAN COMPETITION FORUM June 14-15, 2004 Inter-American Development Bank Andrés Bello Auditorium Washington, D.C., United States TRINIDAD AND TOBBAGO: Institutional

March 2012 Planning Information Brochure 1 Land Protection Planning for the National Wildlife Refuge System The following questions are often asked when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) begins

Niki L. Pace, Research Counsel Mississippi Alabama Sea Grant Legal Program September 15, 2009 What is a land trust? A land trust is a private, nonprofit organization whose mission is the acquisition and

Global Client Group The Gateway to AWM January 2013 For professional investors only Content 1 2 3 Deutsche Bank and Asset Global Client Group Our product and service offering 1 Deutsche Bank A global partner

Charter Background The Peninsular Florida Landscape Conservation Cooperative (Conservation Cooperative) is part of a national network of Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs). LCCs are applied conservation

Comparative cultural policy issues related to cultural diversity in South East Europe. Mapping the approaches and practices by Nada Švob-Đokić and Nina Obuljen a cultural policy paper commissioned by Policies

Tax-free profits Welcome to the geography of tax avoidance 1 Tax-free profits International investment flows are often concentrated in countries with relatively small economies. Why? Welcome to the world